Order date: 07.06.2024.

Today is fixed for admission hearing.

The complainant is moved by the Ld. Advocate for the complainant hearing of admission.

Heard the Ld. Advocate for the complainant.

                It appears that the complainant is the proprietor of a Garment Shop namely “Mitra” which is managed by her son namely Sorav Mitra.  She runs her business by self-employment. During the course of her business, she used the B2B     Platform  owned and operated  by the OP for wholesale purchases since 2020.  While the first year was smooth and subsequently the service provided by the OP is not satisfactory. 

                The OP i.e UDAAN offered her a credit limit of Rs.35,000/-  for purchases on their App. Fact remains that she received orders of missing items and incorrect products which are not ordered by her. Orders are IDs. ODA0AN52MEG2BV created on 15.11.2022 (Annexure-1) & ODA0VBYY85DNJV(Annexure-2) created on 06.04.2023 . In accordance with the return policy of the OP, she claimed returns vide return IDS. RTA0WVB5WNBQ67   , RTA)R758DO4O47, RTA0MA8MKXMOJA,  & RTA0ZV35Y55OD7 but the said return claims were inexplicably cancelled. As a result, she became frustrated with the unwanted and incorrect items. Subsequently, the credit department of the OP began to harass her through telephone calls and demanding for payment of the wrong items, which are in her custody due to failure of return. Then the OP lodged a complaint before Alternate Disputes Resolution Service Provider, recognized by Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India with its online dispute Resolution Platform namely WWW.SAMA.LIVE against her and on the basis of that complaint the Arbitrator passed an Interim Order dt. 11.01.2024 and award in favour of the claimant /OP and accordingly the OP mounted pressure upon the complainant for getting the due amount i.e. the values of goods which were  delivered to this complainant not in consonance with the order . As a result, she could not bear the mental pressure and compelled to pay the disputed amount of Rs. 9083.40. According to this complainant, the OP by putting pressure upon his consumers compelled to pay  a sum  of Rs.9083.40 for cost of wrong items . Then the OP issued “No Due’ certificate dt. 12.01.2024. The complainan5t lodged complaint before UDAAN , a platform to sell damage products and incomplete quantities and also contacted the customer support of OP for a return but his/her requests were denied without any valid reason. However, no action was taken by the OP. So, the complainant getting no alternative, has preferred the recourse of law before the Consumer Commission having appropriate jurisdiction.

Perused the complaint and the Xerox copies of the documents so filed by the complainant. 

It is the case of the complainant that “ Mitra’  is a Proprietorship firm and the complainant is the proprietor of this firm and the said business is run by the proprietor .

From the very nature of the Cause Title of the complainant and the case, it appears that both the parties have been dealing with (B2B) business and the motto of business is to earn profit. Accordingly, the nature of business, it is not possible for the proprietor solely to run the business by saying ‘self-employment’’ to earn her livelihood. Mere earning livelihood in commercial business does not mean that it is not for commercial purpose. Therefore, according to the case of the complainant, it can be said that the business is running and the purchasing of products from the OPs for a commercial purpose and according to the Sec. 2(7)(ii)(a)  of the C.P. Act, 2019, the Complainant is not a ‘consumer’ ,

                                Under the above facts and circumstances, we are of opinion that the complainant is not a ‘Consumer” under the Section of 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as her business entity is used for “Commercial Purpose”. In this scenario, it cannot be said that there is a relationship of consumer. Therefore, this case is not come under the purview of the C. P. Act, 2019.

                Hence,  it is

                                                            ORDERED

that this complaint case be and the same is not admitted and thus disposed of.

                Let a copy of this order be given to the complainant on free of cost.

                     Member                                          Presiding-Member               

D.C.D.R.C., Purba Bardhaman                    D.C.D.R.C., Purba Bardhaman